Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: jory2 Date: Aug 31, 2012 9:41am
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

@Not Allan:
http://archive.org/about/terms.php
"The Archive does not endorse or sponsor any content in the Collections, nor does it guarantee or warrant that the content available in the Collections is accurate, complete, noninfringing, or legally accessible in your jurisdiction, and you agree that you are solely responsible for abiding by all laws and regulations that may be applicable to the viewing of the content. In addition, the Collections are provided to you on an as-is and as-available basis."

I agree 100% with the statement "the issue here is historical integrity." unfortunately this website has absolutely none.

You say; "If the archive finds itself publishing material that is copyrighted"
If?, what do you mean if? I know of zero websites old enough to be in the "public domain" void of Copyright.
You?


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Not Allan Date: Aug 31, 2012 10:42am
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

'I agree 100% with the statement "the issue here is historical integrity." unfortunately this website has absolutely none.'

I don't understand this. Why not? Isn't the purpose of this website to archive the internet, so, why not just do it, with the disclaimers in the terms you have noted?

Also, the 'new owners' are not owners of the earlier web site, they are the new owners of the web site name, that's all. I don't know their motives for blacking out the site with robots.txt, but I suspect that they are not honorable. Why should they be catered to?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: PDpolice Date: Aug 31, 2012 2:12pm
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

In my first post I mentioned that you should “Please keep in mind the open nature of the forum does allow comments by those who do not have the Internet Archives best interest at heart.” I could have listed the names of some of those you have now met. Some posters are similar to a ‘grass-roots’ organization funded by millionaires. Not everyone wants information to be available without constant payment to a corporation or group. Do not equate the posting with the Archive itself.


Please lay out a more thorough argument for the proper treatment of a web page which has had ownership changes. And if you can address the problem of personal information being archived it would help.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Not Allan Date: Aug 31, 2012 9:07pm
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

As pointed out, it is only the ownership of the name that changes, the new owner (unless by agreement with the prior owner) has no access to the content of the earlier web site, that is, he has no access to the files that made up the earlier site.

Therefore the 'new owner' of the name has no claim whatever on the prior web site, and no responsibility for it, and thus should have no say regarding it.

I can't see any counter argument here, can you?

But, the case is even stronger I think. Suppose I own a website, and I now decide that I'd like to have prior incarnations of the site erased from the archive. Should I have that prerogative? I don't think so. Ownership has nothing to do with it that I can see.

As for personal information, I don't see any difference if its posted on the active web or archived. The reasons for removing it from the web would apply equally to removing it from the archive and thus the question regarding the archive is identical to the question for the active web.

After all, the archive is part of the the active web.

I suppose if I am the owner of a site (past and present) and I want to remove personal info then the archive should consider that on a case by case basis, and the removal should explicitly noted on the web page, and the removal should not be hidden and invisible).

This post was modified by Not Allan on 2012-08-31 21:46:57

This post was modified by Not Allan on 2012-08-31 21:49:36

This post was modified by Not Allan on 2012-08-31 21:50:24

This post was modified by Not Allan on 2012-09-01 04:07:05

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: daffaela Date: Nov 15, 2013 11:44pm
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

No kidding. You used to be able to batch upload all the shows you wanted to submit to one host (no interaction thanks to .netrc) and then go to the contribution page after they were finished uploading. How long is the old upload ftp site going to be in operation?
Great info Thanks

Alfaonline.com Toko belanja online murah Promo heboh jual barang hanya Rp 1 - Toko belanja online murah - Alfaonline.com

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jory2 Date: Aug 31, 2012 10:55am
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

@ Not Allan:
I don't think you understand even the basics of copyright laws so there's no point in this discussion; for me anyway.
Take care!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: andy forester Date: Feb 10, 2013 1:07pm
Forum: web Subject: Re: robots.txt

I totally agree. Its the copyright law, you can ask any lawyer around.My blog - copyrighted?